Sawyer v. Whitley

Summary

The Court affirmed the Fifth Circuit's refusal to reach Sawyer's successive and abusive habeas claims. Chief Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justices White, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, and Thomas, held that actual innocence of the death penalty requires clear and convincing evidence that, absent constitutional error, no reasonable juror would have found the prisoner eligible for death under state law. The inquiry concerns eligibility requirements, not additional mitigating evidence bearing only on the discretionary sentencing decision. Sawyer's medical records and allegedly withheld evidence did not satisfy that standard. Justice Blackmun concurred in the judgment, joined Justice Stevens's opinion, and separately criticized restricting the miscarriage-of-justice exception to actual innocence and questioned whether increasingly restricted habeas review could sustain fair administration of capital punishment. Justice Stevens, joined by Justices Blackmun and O'Connor, concurred in the judgment but advocated allowing review when the prisoner shows it is more likely than not that the death sentence was clearly erroneous, considering both aggravating and mitigating evidence. He concluded that Sawyer failed even that broader test.